5.56 ineffective (again)

[280man]

I almost had myself talked into an Armalite in 223. I feel compelled to act before the AWB gets extended without warning, (how about that vote in the Senate last month! Warner of VA- what a traitor!)

In any case, years ago I developed an inbred disdain for the 223 especially in combat, from stuff I read, and also from a friend who was in Vietnam and happened to tote both the M14 and then the M16. Then it seems that the highly accurate and light weight, and short barreled M4's started to seduce me! How could SO many people be wrong???? Well I just came back to my senses...

Interesting article in a mag called Special Weapons for Military and Police. Actual reports back from Iraq. One marine shot an enemy combatant three times at about 300 yards but did not kill him. Another report shot one combatant at about 100 yards, center of mass, did not kill. Another report of two hits center of mass, again did not kill...

It seems that engineering, physics, experience, and common sense dictate the 308 for actual fighing. All that light weight, extra ammo stuff, awwwww fer-get it! An honest to goodness, battle rifle for fighting, at a minimum ought to fling out those 150 grainers in 30 caliber. That is what I do be thinking these days.

I don't have much money, (or I would buy one of everything) so I gotta cross that Armalite in 223 off the list. Gonna git me an FAl or an HK. Soon!

[AR15_Fanatic]

Sounds like the 5.56 mm FMJ round is doing exactly what it was designed to do - wound and not kill. I'm gonna open up a new topic for this subject specifically for both PerfectUnion members, both civilian as well as returning military personnel who have had to use the M-16 against Fedayeen and Taliban scumbags and see what they think of the Army's strategy of high volume of fire and decreased lethality versus the realities to needing to stop an opponent on the battlefield before he can hurt you.

Personally I come from the school that if a man takes up a weapon and intends to kill you, you should be equipped with a response that can kill him as fast as possible and is not overkill i.e. using a .50 BMG for CQB conditions. I do however stand by the AR-15 / M-16 system as an acceptable means to dispense that solution. The lethality of the AR can be increased by using the ballistic tip or hollow point ammunition (as a civilian, I'm not under the Geneva Conventions which prohibit the use of anything except an FMJ bullet on the battlefield) and a heavier bullet (> 70 grain). This will offer close to the stopping power of a .308 FMJ round while still providing the high fire volume of the 5.56 mm round

There is one final advantage to the 5.56mm round in urban conditions and that is that it has less energy and therefore easier to control where it ends up. Still a frangible in both calibers solves that problem in a hurry - but your opponent better not have body armor for that to work!

[gossman]

Have to weigh in on this explosive topic. 5.56 is an effective weapon. So is the .308, .06, 7.62x39, etc... All work like they were suppose to. Remember that they are using the 5.56 against small bodied people, just like in Vietnam. Any round will go thru when FMJ is used. Buy both 280man, the AR is a great, effective, very accurate round. The .308 is also a great, effective, accurate round. I do not discount either with the exception to the recoil and expense of shooting. Although Port ammo is a bargain in .308. As far as the reading of the AR as a poor battle rifle, you are reading the wrong stuff. The M-16 is a proven rifle in combat, it has been used effectivly for 40 years. The M-14 was a problematic rifle for most of the short time it was used. Too hard to handle on full auto, heavy, and cumbersome. The M-16 had it share of problems also in the early years but those are behind it now. I suggest that you buy an AR since it is most likely the last civilian version battle rifle you will get to purchase, I am guessing that the next rifle that comes out for the US Military will not be allowed in a civilian version. Then get yourself an M1 and a M1A. You will not be sorry that you all three. When you are done the AR will have gotten most of the use. :usa:

[Voodoo]

Although the AR/5.56 is not my personal weapon (system?) of choice, I have to agree with gossman. I was in both Afghanistan and Iraq and I saw the M16/M4 work very well under some pretty bad conditions. It is NOT a long-range item. More like 250 yards (I don't think I would like to use it past that range) and under for the M16, and realistically I think it would be less for the M4. Granted, my TO&E weapon was an M60D/M9, but I have been around the M16 and it's variants for 13 years, and although it has it's shortcomings(hell, show me a rifle that someone, somewhere, won't find something about it to complain about), I think it is one of the better systems around.

The Brits, Canadians, Australians, and Polish like it a lot.

Voodoo

[AR15_Fanatic]

The Brits, Canadians, Australians, and Polish like it a lot.

Yep, and if you were issued an Enfield M85 Individual Weapon piece of s**t versus having an M-16 in your hands you'd love the M-16 as well.

Ahh, the M-14 - you're right that they're (almost) uncontrollable in automatic fire modes, but as civilians with limited access to Class III weapons, they're great semi auto rifles - and they're great semi auto sniper rifles as well. Right now I'm building a custom M-21 setup which should be done in June. I've always found the M-14 to be pretty near perfect for long range semi auto work and with the .308 packing about half the kick of a 12 gauge, its easy on the shoulder but lets you know its doing its job. The rifle just feel right in the hands and I understand why actor R. Lee Ermey lets off an exuberant "OOHRAH!!" every time he shoots one on the television show Mail Call. For close range work, however, I still rely on the "Mouse that Roared" - a Bushmaster AR-15 carbine. A great gun in its own right too. I agree that despite having "800 yard sights", your effective range with an military grade AR-15 is limited to about 300 yards. But for a civilian in an urban environment, that's more than adequate. And all those extra rounds mean you can unleash a whole lotta hell on a bad guy quick!

[iceman]

I have to jump in here and say that they people I know of with the Canadina Armed Forces are happy with the C7 (M-16) and C-8 (M-4) rifles. For those of you in the AR forum, you might want to check out www.diemaco.com.
They build the C7 and C8 rifle for the armed forces and are in the process of upgrading them. You might be interested iw what they have in store. ;)

[AR15_Fanatic]

Cool! I had known that the Canadians use M-16 / M-4 clones in their military as well. They look like nice AR rifles too. Does Diemaco sell to private citizens as well?

[iceman]

Thats the sad thing Fanatic....They only sell to military and law enforcement.
But it wouldn't someone from using there ideas.

[ice-nine]

Atypical situations aside, It seems to me that the 5.56 mm does what it was intended to do.

at the expected distance;
http://www.logicsouth.com/~lcoble/stuff/nato1.txt

and a viable combination of ammo, barrel length.
2700 fps will yield fragmentation and lethality;
http://www.ammo-oracle.com/body.htm#m193orm855
http://www.ammo-oracle.com/body.htm#velocity
http://www.ammo-oracle.com/body.htm#fragrange


are these tables full of it?

[AR15_Fanatic]

Thats the sad thing Fanatic....They only sell to military and law enforcement.

Dammit! Michael Moore is a lyin' SOB!

[Bam Bam]

If I recall right, the M-16 was first given to the military as an Air Force security weapon, like a M-1 carbine on steroids. Later Spec Ops guys tried them and liked them for their typical close-in stuff.
So, this weapon system kinda sneaked in the back door a bit. Was not intended to be 600 meter effective battlerifle in beginning, but has done pretty well, even so.
On the stopping power at close range, a vet related he shot a VC at 10 yards with M-14, I think it was 6 times, guy kept getting back up after being popped. Took a grenade to finally keep him down. :o

[AR15_Fanatic]

Actually, the USAF adoption of the AR-15 / M-16 weapons system came about from a shrewd pitch from a Colt sales rep at a 4th of July picnic for defense contractors. The Colt rep allowed another man at the picnic to 'kill' a few watermelon using a company sample AR-15 rifle. That man turned out to be Strategic Air Command General Curtis LeMay. LeMay liked the AR-15 so much that he ordered a batch of 8,000 AR-15s right there on the spot for use by USAF security crews.

[gossman]

Effectiveness of the weapon cannot be calculated by how fast a hit drops to the ground. Unless the electrical system is severed ( spine, brain, etc..) the possibility of not dropping is there. It is no different from big game hunting. The size and speed of a bullet has little effect if the spine or brain is not shut down immediatly. Add to the fact that the US uses FMJ bullets rather than frangibles. If we want sudden drops, everyone should shoot RPG's instead of rifles. The Geneva Convention should be concerned with the insurgents in Iraq using the RPG's as weapons, which goes against the rules of land warfare. Our troops should be issued soft points at this time until the use io RPG's are ended. We should also use pork based bullet lube and let it be known to the terrosrists. See if they are willing to give their life without the chance to see Allah or get their virgins.

[AR15_Fanatic]

Even a heart shot which, in theory, will cause instantaneous death, the victim may still remain conscious and fully functioning for a good 4-5 seconds prior to shock and unconsciousness.

Actually none of the ammunition types used on the battlefield have a whole lot of stopping power. A 5.56 mm or .308 caliber FMJ round will go through a person's body like a red hot knife through butter. As such, very little of the kinetic energy of the bullet is dispersed into the target and not very much damage is done (besides tissue and bone damaged by being in the bullet's immediate flight path). The stopping power of a bullet has to to with the physics of a bullet impact on a target. When a bullet hits an object and is imbedded in it, stopping its motion very quickly, it creates a shockwave through the object centered at the impact site. This shockwave - and not the bullet penetrating the flesh - is what does the most damage and the ability of the bullet to do this is what defines its stopping power. Stopping power can be calculated from knowledge of the impact energy of the round, bullet size and shape, impact velocity and the nature of the target. So a small bullet with pointed shape and high energy won't have much stopping power. (This is why it's illegal to hunt with FMJ ammo and why the military won't use soft nosed or hollow point bullets). That being said, a gunshot wound inflicted from a 5.56 mm weapon using FMJ ammo has a high chance of being lethal from secondary complications i.e. internal hemmoraging, suffocation due to pulmonary damage, infection, damage to the GI tract, etc. of the gunshot wound.

The reasons for the use of low damage ammunition are many - wounded soldiers cause more pandamonium and confusion, medical treatment is easier after combat has ended, and simply wounding a combatant puts most soldiers out of action and removes the threat without loss of life. Being shot is psychologically traumatic as well and the onset of the fear of dying quickly drives out patriotic or personal motivations for aggression. There are the exceptions, such as the VC that Bam Bam talked about, that can put that all aside, or have chosen to die there - but not before they accomplish their objectives for God, family and country.

[280man]

Ice-Nine:

Your link to ammo oracle: http://www.ammo-oracle.com/body.htm#diff
changed my entire way of thinking.

Thanks for that link!

It is the first well informed engineering defense of the 223 that made
sense to me. Thanks a bunch!

[ice-nine]

Da Nada
(Don't ya just want a 24 inch barrel now?)

[thickmojo]

How about if we split the difference, 6.8 mm?

[ice-nine]

I'm all for the 6.5 mm
and the FN is a superior design in almost any caliber.
http://www.cybertorpedo.com/africanhunter/...slrrifle_01.htm (http://www.cybertorpedo.com/africanhunter/firearms/fnslrrifle_01.htm)
The M240 and M249 SAW are standing on the shoulders of a giant.

I just get twitchy when people start bagging on the 5.56 mm NATO.
It is what it is. At reasonable ranges with a reasonable barrel length it acts as intended.

WWII veterans I've talked to, Ok worked for throwing hay bales, loved the m1 carbine in .30 cal, and that is from what I read roughly equivalent to a .357 magnum. the 5.56 mm is a better carbine round.

[280man]

http://home.snafu.de/l.moeller/military_bu...d_patterns.html (http://home.snafu.de/l.moeller/military_bullet_wound_patterns.html)

This link has a great chart of photos of m193 55 grainers and how they do or don't fragment at various velocities. It seems you have to be hitting target at or above at least 2700 fps. These pictures tell the whole story it seems.

[108DRAGON]

If you can't pack a bunch of rifles, pack different ammo. We civillians may not be able to pack military gear, but we aren't limited to using military ammo either. I have found the 40 grain VMax rounds to be nasty at close to medium ranges against critters. High velocity(even in shorter barrels) & frangibility should make them quite brutal in CQB situations as well. The sale of these in boxes marked "Police T.A.P." should be enough bolster my assumption.
AR_Fanatic is right. Tissue disruption is the key to instantaniously dropping a combatant.. short of a brainpan or spinal shot.
Again, the 1 in 7 vs. 1 in 9 barrel thing. You'll trade down range accuracy for terminal ballistics and vice versa.
In any gunfight, best thing is shot placement and double tapping. Only turn your back on a corpse. If you're shooting any further than 250 yards with an M4, you've got the wrong golf club, brother. :ar15:

[AR15_Fanatic]

If you're shooting any further than 250 yards with an M4, you've got the wrong golf club, brother.

The 5.56mm may be a little lackluster for battlefield situations, but as an urban or police round it is nearly ideal, engagement range don't extend past about 200 yards and there's less chance of a ricochet after the round passes through the target because most of the energy will be expended in the target. You also have the fragmentation effects and tissue damage that occurs at those ranges giving it tremendous stopping power. All of these factors make it extremely useful for home security as well.

If Goldi-Locks tested firearms for battlefield use, she'd say the .308 is too hard, the 5.56mm is too soft, but the 6.8mm is juuuuuuust right.........

[108DRAGON]

Hey AR15_Fanatic.
Can you imagine what a pain in the *** it's going to be phasing out all those military 5.56 uppers and weapons in favor of the 6.8?
But hey, there will be a flood of them (5.56) on the open market. Then we can afford to buy a whole mess of 'em. Yes! :D

[AR15_Fanatic]

Yeah, you might be able to get some sweet deals on Lake City M193 rounds in bulk.

As I understand it, if they adopt the XM-8 into service, they're also going to adopt a new 5.56mm cartridge that uses a brass base with composite walls. This supposedly will drastically reduce the weight of the cartridges, lightening the bruden of the already taxed foot soldier.

As good as the 6.8 mm is, it may not overcome NATO prejudice and enter service.

[108DRAGON]

That's kinda what I'm thinking too. H&K has been pushing to shift the subgun standards away from 9mm for some time. Thier new designs have been too radical a departure from the "norms", and will require too much in the way of "chedder", for NATO to dump all the currently fielded equipment. The Feds tested the 10mm in the field and found overpenetration in practical use even though previous testing negated this to be. Ergo, the shift back towards the venerable .45. More law enforcement (around here) carry .45 than anything else, in spite of the perported advantages of .357 Sig.
As far as the 5.56 is concerned: When Britain went to the SA85, there was a flood of FAL parts kits on the open market. ...good parts, not burntout barrels and trashed bolts and mechanicals. I'm kinda hoping the same thing will happen with the M16/AR15 during the switch to 6.8...if it happens.
Then again, I'm not really sure about the 6.8. Stopping power is seriously overrated. If the guys aren't shooting well enough with the M4's 5.56, what makes us think they'll be any better off with the 6.8? I'm sure that there will be test groups in the SOCOM /SAS/ GSG fields before NATO calls it, either way.

[AR15_Fanatic]

If they could build a higher velocity version of the 5.56mm (call it the .223HV or something like that) that had a muzzle velocity of about 4500 fps, you might be able ot retain the fragmentation effects all the way out to 500yds or so, thereby making the 5.56mm an ideal cartridge for use in modern warfare.

The 6.8mm is a heavier bullet that can cause more damage tumbling through a body than can the 5.56mm round. I believe this has been the culprit in a number of engagements in the recent Afghanistan and Iraq campaigns. Our guys could hit 'em at these ranges with the M4s but Afghani people are smaller in stature and lighter than the average westerner. We found that at 300+ yards that the round would go clean through 'em like a knife through butter, producing little damage in the process. The larger caliber rounds like the .30 cal, tend to tumble and deposit more of their energy into the target, causing more damage.

Against unarmored humans at close range, few rounds seem to be as effective as the .45ACP. It's still preferred by many vets as well as special LE Units (Most notable the LAPD SWAT teams use it universally for their sidearms). I have noticed the trend towards the small caliber, hyper velocity rounds for sub-machine guns, from FN's unorthodox P90, which is chambered for the 5.7 x 28mm to HK's MP-7 PDW, firing the 4.7 x 30mm round. Both of these designs have emerged due to the recent advancements and subsequent issue of lightweight, soft body armor capable of defeating the older, slower, large caliber pistol rounds.

Even if we do not switch to the 6.8mm, it seems to me that the change to the M-8 assault rifle is inevitable at this point, so we'll probably be seeing a lot of good AR-15/M-16 parts, one way or the other. However, I believe that ex-president Clinton signed a bill into law banning the sale of surplus military supplies to the American public. I don't, however know this for sure or the details of it, so you may not see access to those USGI gun parts at a local gunstore or show. I do know that a number of DCM clubs recently tried, or are still trying, to get access to the hundreds of thousands of surplus M-14 rifles that the government has held on to since the '60s, I dont know if they have been sucessful of obtaining them for the reason mentioned above. The VPC would probably have a fit if they knew this was going on!

[108DRAGON]

The .223 is still only a hyped .22. If a pint is holding a pint, its doing the best it can. The powder levels and pressures involved in raising the .223's velocity up to the 4500 fps range would make the round fragment in air (or at least deform). Look at the length and shape of the ultra high velocity 6mm rounds. It would be a cheaper proposition to go to the 6.8. It would also be brutal on the weapon to the point of unreliability. I burn up barrels just raising the powder level a few grains to compensate for a shorter barrel. Increase in muzzle blast and recoil would be an issue also.
The 7.62x39 isn't much better at longer engagement ranges. Looking at Winchester's charts, the bullet trajectory and velocity drop at 300+ yards is terrible. It is rated at "marginal" for deer hunting. In combat, its weight is about the only thing its got going for it. I say we ought to go ahead and field the Springfield SOCOM and Troy's Rock SOPMOD. Our 7.62x51 is known quantity to our troops and so is the M14. The SOPMOD is MOA accurate wt. a 16" bbl. and its proprietary recoil compensator /gas system cuts its recoil in half. It should be very controllable in full auto for "crowd dispersment". The SOCOM is inexpensive enough to provide heavy saturation amongst our troops.
If you notice, the "non standard" weapons and ammo are still only in the Special Ops. sectors and still see very little use outside that arena.. read "untested in the real world". Spec. Ops. trained shooters' shot placement and precision would make any round look good. "Defense Review" said the same thing you did about the 6.8 and the Brass throwing a drag about it. They quoted "supply issues" as the reason. If I had good money to bet, I'd still put it on "non confidence in a round not tested full spectrum".
Think about it and look at it from our enemies' perspective: Winchester says we would be better off throwing the 7.62X39 at each other than shooting it. Real world combat testing by our enemies against us through several wars has proven to them that this round is both effective within its intended purpose, and economical. Heck, over there, they seem to give AKs away like Christmas candy. We still have to buy 'em here.
Personally, I agree with what you said in another posting. roughly: the AR15 / M16 and the .223 are reliable within thier intended use parameters.
Also, if you were "government", why would you pass out to the masses an "obsolete" weapon (the M14) system that has -since its mothballing- still proven cutting edge effective. Troy Industries has hinted at access to preban M14s for use in thier SOPMOD project for the SOCOM sector. It wouldn't surprise me to see these "lost M14s" surface here.